1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a posterior placed total lumbar artificial disc (“PTTLAD”) without supplemental instrumentation, that uses removable bi-functional screws, sliding expansile plates, and interchangeable cores which enhance individualized custom-fitting. In addition, oblique plate traction spikes are used for enhanced vertebral endplate penetration and incorporation. The present invention also relates to artificial total lumbar discs which can be posteriorly introduced into the lumbar spinal intervertebral disc space, unilaterally, from either left or right side.
2. Description of the Relevant Art
Cervical and lumbar total artificial discs are entering the clinical neurosurgical and orthopedic markets. The benefits of these artificial discs are well known. They replace diseased discs, and preserve motion segment mobility. Discogenic and radicular pain are relieved without forfeiting segmental mobility, which is typical of traditional anterior or posterior lumbar fusions. Thus it is currently rational to place prosthetic discs anteriorly where access can be easily obtained, and they can be secured by a variety of anterior screw fixations. This technology is adequate for single level disc replacement in the cervical spine. However based on the current anterior cervical prosthetic disc screw fixation methodology its implantation is periodically complicated by screw failures e.g. partial or complete screw pullouts or breaks, and in most designs it is limited to single level replacement. Furthermore, for lumbar total artificial discs, placement is limited to only the L4/5 and L5/S1 disc spaces, and not above, secondary to aortic and vena caval anatomical restraints. Likewise, for the thoracic spine. Thus far no type of thoracic prosthetic disc device has been reported or described. Furthermore, despite the purported safety of placement of the current anterior total lumbar artificial discs, there is a significant risk of retrograde ejaculations in males, and the risk of vascular injury, which although small, is potentially catastrophic if it occurs.
The design of total artificial discs, which began in the 1970's, and in earnest in the 1980's, consists essentially of a core (synthetic nucleus pulposus) surrounded by a container (pseudo-annulus). Cores have consisted of rubber (polyolefin), polyurethane (Bryan-Cervical), silicon, stainless steel, metal on metal, ball on trough design (Bristol-Cervical, Prestige-Cervical), Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) with either a biconvex design allowing unconstrained kinematic motion (Link SB Charite-Lumbar), or a monoconvex design allowing semiconstrained motion (Prodisc-Lumbar). There is also a biologic 3-D fabric artificial disc interwoven with high molecular weight polyethylene fiber, which has only been tested in animals. Cervical and lumbar artificial discs are premised on either mechanical or viscoelastic design principles. The advantages of mechanical metal on metal designs including the stainless steel ball on trough design and the UHMWPE prostheses include their low friction, and excellent wear characteristics allowing long term motion preservation. Their major limitation is the lack of elasticity and shock absorption capacity. The favorable features of the viscoelastic prosthetics include unconstrained kinematic motion with flexion, extension, lateral bending, axial rotation and translation, as well as its cushioning and shock absorption capacity. On the other hand, their long term durability beyond ten years is not currently known. Containers have consisted of titanium plates, cobalt chrome or bioactive materials. This history is reviewed and well documented in Guyer, R. D., and Ohnmeiss, D. D. “Intervertebral disc prostheses”, Spine 28, Number 15S, S15-S23, 2003; and Wai, E. K., Selmon, G. P. K. and Fraser, R. D. “Disc replacement arthroplasties: Can the success of hip and knee replacements be repeated in the spine?”, Seminars in Spine Surgery 15, No 4: 473-482, 2003.
It would be ideal if total lumbar artificial discs could be placed posteriorly allowing access to all levels of the lumbar spine. Also one could place these devices posteriorly in thoracic disc spaces through a transpedicular approach. Similarly if these devices can be placed anteriorly particularly in the cervical spine without anterior screw fixation, and custom-fit it for each disc in each individual, the ease of placement would reduce morbidity and allow for multi-level disc replacement. Placement of an artificial disc in the lumbar spine if inserted posteriorly through a unilateral laminotomy by using a classical open microscopic approach or by using a minimally invasive tubular endoscopic approach would significantly reduce the possibility of recurrent disc herniation. If placed without facet joint violation, or with only unilateral mesial facetectomy, and the device can purchase the endplates with spikes there would be no need for supplemental posterior pedicle screw fixation, thus obviating the associated morbidity associated with pedicle screws and bone harvesting. To take it one step further, if artificial lumbar discs can be posteriorly placed successfully and safely throughout the entire lumbar spine, every routine lumbar discectomy could be augmented by artificial disc placement which would simultaneously eliminate discogenic and radicular pain while preserving flexibility. Furthermore by so doing, the probability of recurrent herniation plummets, and subsequently the need for posterior pedicle instrumentation plummets, thereby diminishing overall spinal morbidity, expenditure, and leading to the overall improvement in the quality of life.
Presumably up to now, technology is not focusing on posterior placement of total lumbar prosthetic discs because of inadequate access to the disc space posteriorly. To circumvent this problem others have been working on the posterior placement, not of a total prosthetic disc but of a prosthetic disc nucleus (PDN), or essentially a core without a container (pseudo annulus). PDNs, which are considered post-discectomy augmentations, have consisted of one of the following materials: 1) hydrogel core surrounded by a polyethylene jacket (Prosthetic Disc Nucleus). Two of these devices have to be put in. There is a very high, 38% extrusion rate, 2) Polyvinyl alcohol (Aquarelle), 3) polycarbonate urethane elastomer with a memory coiling spiral (Newcleus), 4) Hydrogel memory coiling material that hydrates to fill then disc space, 5) Biodisc consisting of in-situ injectable and rapidly curable protein hydrogel, 6) Prosthetic Intervertebral Nucleus (PIN) consisting of a polyurethane balloon implant with in-situ injectable rapidly curable polyurethane and 7) thermopolymer nucleus implant. (See the two publications identified above). The approach of posteriorly placing artificial disc cores appears to be flawed in that: 1) there is a high extrusion rate, 2) it lacks good fixation as does total prosthetic devices that are placed anteriorly, 3) it is restricted only to early symptomatically disrupted discs which have only nucleus pulposus but not annulus or endplate pathology, and 4) are contraindicated in discs with an interspace height of less than 5 mm.
The primary advantages of artificial disc placement include the replacement of diseased discs with prosthetic devices which mimic as much as possible healthy natural discs thereby relieving axial and radicular pain without forfeiting segmental mobility. There are currently in the orthopedic and neurosurgical markets FDA approved anteriorly placed artificial total lumbar discs. The major disadvantages of anterior placement of these devices include vascular injury, blood loss, and retrograde ejaculation in males.
In our previous copending patent application Ser. No. 11/019,351, filed on Dec. 23, 2004 and Ser. No. 10/964,633, filed on Oct. 15, 2004, which are herein incorporated by reference, we have described artificial expansile total discs for placement throughout the entire spine. The relevant history and prior art of artificial discs are summarized and reviewed there. The artificial discs described in our previous patent applications expand in two or three dimensions, and have internal expanding mechanisms which necessitate a bilateral surgical approach for posterior placement into the lumbar spine. In one embodiment of the present invention, we have simplified the design by omitting an internal expansion mechanism, and by having the one-pieced disc plates expand in only one direction. These modifications make it technically easy to place with minimal disruption of the normal spinal anatomy and with minimal morbidity. Currently in the spinal market there exist only anteriorly placed total artificial lumbar discs. The risks of the anterior placement of these discs are well known and documented, and include but are not limited by vascular injury and retrograde ejaculation. Their surgical removal if warranted is technically challenging and potentially fatal in extreme circumstances. Our design retains all the benefits of the anterior artificial disc with respect to motion preservation, and has none of the above mentioned risks. In addition we introduce an additional novel safety feature, ball limiters, which prevent extrusion of the ball from the artificial disc, and limit complete unrestrained motion.